Opinion

Letter to the Editor-Bob Smith

Posted:
10/02/2012 11:18:19 AM MDT

Updated:
10/02/2012 11:18:49 AM MDT

Editor, Citizens beware! A crime has been committed by the City and any appropriate compensation for damage has been passed off with “governmental immunity”. Governmental immunity covers accidental destruction of property in the line of duty, but not in the case of willful and wanton trespassing and destruction of private property. While I cannot prove malice it is clear that our property rights have been violated. While we were on vacation the City elected to brutally cut all six of our 32 year-old evergreen trees along the bike path. The cuts were made 8’ to 9’ up the entire north side of the trees. The cuts could have only been accomplished by physically crossing over a locked 4’ chain link fence. Interestingly, none of the other trees along the bike path, with visible encroachment, were touched. In our estimate and with knowledge from the County Extension office, the trees are severely compromised as all but one of the cuts on all six trees was improperly made. The cuts are now bleeding and cannot heal until I go back in and properly recut every branch wound. For the already compromised health of the trees, we cannot do this until the weather turns colder. The City should know irreparable harm can occur by cutting trees in the heat of summer. Because of the vulnerability of the trees, I had to build a 6’ wood privacy fence, to stabilize and protect the now lopsided trees from wind and further destruction.

Advertisement

According to City officials there were five complaints about encroachment from walkers, bicyclists and a person driving a golf cart. For the sake of argument, let’s dismiss the golf cart complaint as there are signs prohibiting motorized vehicles on the bike path. If there were truly complaints, why wasn’t protocol followed and proper notification given to the homeowner? My trees are at least 4’ in from my chain link fence and never touched the asphalt on the bike path. So who are the complainants? Was there immediate danger to the public? I think not. Hence, the City had no right to enter my property illegally. With proper notification, I would have gladly trimmed the trees myself without compromising the integrity or health of these beautiful trees. After pictures of the damage and visits with City officials the nominal fence permit fee was rightfully waived. The City has also agreed to follow proper notification procedures in the future. But I ask any citizen if this is appropriate compensation for the unnecessary expense and labor we have had to incur trying to save these statuesque trees. How does one place a value on such trees if they do not recover? At the very least we should be reimbursed the unbudgeted $1100 we have had to shell out for new fence materials. But really, how does one place a value on such trees of magnitude. Since the City claims to be a Tree City, I am now convinced the City only pays “lip service” to the value of trees to our community and to our environment.Governmental immunity or not, former Administrators have done right by citizens. Further, I still find it extremely difficult to believe that one employee could take it upon himself to enter private property in our absence, to butcher our trees without proper notification and without a work order from a higher up official. Even though I suspect the response will be “governmental immunity” I am forwarding this letter to the City’s insurance with pictures clearly depicting the beauty of these trees from the south and the hack job on the north. With regrets it has come to this,Bob Smith, Violated Property Owner